Sensitivity training 'a nice first symbolic gesture,' but attitudes need to change, not just language: trainer

A member of the Manitoba Legislature has said he'll seek sensitivity training after drawing fire for a comment on asylum seekers — but one person who delivers that kind of training says it's only a start.

Progressive Conservative MLA Cliff Graydon was criticized for a comment he made on social media last week calling asylum seekers a "drain on society."

Graydon, who represents the southern Manitoba riding of Emerson, made the comment when replying to a tweet Jan. 31 about asylum seekers' claims in Canada that referred to claimants as "illegals."

The comment appears to have since been deleted, and Graydon later tweeted an apology, adding he plans on taking sensitivity training while limiting his social media activity.

But how effective is sensitivity training, especially when it happens retroactively?

On Thursday, Marcy Markusa, host of CBC Manitoba's Information Radio, put that question to Fadi Ennab, a researcher with the Manitoba Association of Newcomer Serving Organizations who has trained hundreds of Manitobans about cultural competency.

Here's a transcript of their conversation.

What do you think of Graydon's response?

I think it's a nice first symbolic gesture, to go for training, but unfortunately training is always seen as a reactive — that you do a harm and then go for training. I hope that if the training is effective, then his values need to change in addition to his language use.

In this context, words have a damaging impact and unfortunately they're very common in society across Canada and internationally. When you label a refugee or asylum seekers as a threat or a drain, or whatever you want to call it, it really impacts those people who face a lot of persecution.

Instead of giving them love, we're giving them hate.

What's the challenge of training coming after something has already been said?

In reality, you need more than just the training — you need positive relations with, let's say, asylum seekers to make you have a better understanding.

Unfortunately, if people go through a training and now they know what [word] to use — so instead of saying "a drain" they might say "undocumented" — now you've improved the language, but unless your values change toward them, do you feel that society needs to include them and be empathic to them?

We see training as a process, not as an end point.- Fadi Ennab

There are some people out there, who in spite of being challenged and learning about the other experiences, they might be more defensive after the training, so in a sense your training might be seen as a failure for some people, because they need more than just the training.

Maybe because they're used to a certain way of life and they only got challenged in a setting like a training session, they might be more defensive — so the nut becomes harder to crack after the training.

How do you break through that defensiveness?

Defensiveness is a very common way of starting your learning journey — it's just what you do with that. Do you stay defensive and wrought with your resentment or do you take it as an opportunity to learn more?

It's important to lead a lot with lived experiences, whether my own experience, or maybe by getting a guest speaker who is a refugee. But also to situate the broader context about Canada, the relationship with the land and the treaties — the systemic issues — because it's not just about refugees but how we treat the other, whether it's Indigenous [people] or other groups.

Once you situate the lived experience with systemic issues, people start understanding that it's a complicated system and we can be complicit, and we have a responsibility to change.

We see training as a process, not as an end point.

If sensitivity training after the fact may not be the answer, what should be?

I would prefer something that is more clear about social equity, so I would call it anti-racist, anti-oppressive training, which is more than just cultural safety and proficiency.

I'd wish that it could be as early learning in child-care settings, so then we don't have people — especially in power — saying something [inappropriate], because we need to be accountable when we have power.

Words are really damaging and it can mobilize aspects in our community toward people who need help and support.